Arizona Demands Return of Federal Lands - A Step in the Right Direction?

In light of NDAA and other draconian bills passed by this administration as well as the collapse of the global economic system, could we be witnessing
the first signs of secession in the US? Which state will be first to give the thumb to the FED?

I always thought it would be Texas but I could be partial.

Arizona seems to be on the forefront in the battle against the overbearing US Government. With the SCOTUS set to defend Arizona’s immigration
policy, this is yet another sign of the state growing weary of the usurpation of power by the FED. Following Utah's lead:

Arizona is poised to join next-door neighbor Utah in demanding the U.S. government transfer title to millions of acres of federal property to the
state, fanning a renewed "sagebrush revolt" over control of public lands in the West.

The Arizona state Senate, on a 19-9 vote, gave final legislative approval on Wednesday to a measure calling for federal agencies to relinquish roughly
48,000 square miles (124,000 sq km) of acreage they own in the Grand Canyon state by 2015.

The Republican-backed bill was approved by the state House of Representatives on Monday. It now goes to Republican Governor Jan Brewer, who has five
days once the bill reaches her desk to sign or veto it. Otherwise, it becomes law automatically.

Four years after federal officials quietly surrendered thousands of acres of America's border to Mexican drug gangs and illegals, there still are
"no plans to reopen" the taxpayer-owned national park lands. Read more:
www.foxnews.com...

Bottom line is that the FED has no right to ‘occupy’ a state’s land without approval from the citizens of that state. Apparently the
‘citizens’ of Arizona have seen, heard and experienced enough BS from the FED! More power to them!!!

I would like to see Arizona keep their lands open to the public instead of wanting to sell off all of that land.

Selling that land is not right, it is public land, for public use.

Taking back the land just to sell will let other countries like China come in and buy up all of that land with the trillions of US dollars that they
have that is otherwise worthless.

As much as YOU or I may not like it, the citizens of Arizona have the right to decide what they do with the lands in their state. If those lands can
be turned into a profit (Alaska is a good example) and the citizens benefit then more power to them (literally

)! The quality of life and
affordable energy that can be provided from utilizing their land in a productive way can benefit everyone in Arizona and Utah.

Maybe the FED shouldn’t be solely responsible for the fate of US citizens? Could that be what the founders had in mind?

In the long-run, it just means they will have used up their valuable resources. But if they want to do that, for short term gain, to patch up their
own budget shortfalls, I guess they are free to do so...

There are enough resources below our feet to sustain us for hundreds of years without a single import (which won’t happen) so I don’t consider
that a valid concern.

Isn't the same group of buffoons who sold their state house and then bought it back at a loss?

How many programs have the FEDS bankrupted? Fanny and Freddy, USPO, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, THE COUNTRY!!!

I doubt brewer will actually sign this...

If she doesn’t sign it then it automatically becomes LAW after 5 days!

Originally posted by RussianScientists
I would like to see Arizona keep their lands open to the public instead of wanting to sell off all of that land.

Selling that land is not right, it is public land, for public use.

Taking back the land just to sell will let other countries like China come in and buy up all of that land with the trillions of US dollars that they
have that is otherwise worthless.

Do you not think that the people of that state should be the one to make that kind of decision?

If they want to protect their land, they should be able to fight their LOCAL government to protect it. This is a battle that should be fought state by
state.

The federal government is just as corrupt as regional government - of not more so. If I were in the USA, I would want my state to be answerable to
their citizens on the protection or sale of land. It's much easier for the people of that state to fight corruption and corporatism and protect their
natural resources if the people they have to fight are just down the road, and you don't need millions of $'s in lobbying either.

I have no doubt that those in state government have little "secret deals" with developers here, they are seeing an opportunity to make money. But
it's up to the people of that state to fight it.

There's no need for secession now just as there wasn't one in 1861.
We just need to allow the states to return to the level of power they had in 1860. As the Founders intended. 1 of the many unintended consequences of
the Civil War was the unchecked power of a federal government gone awry. Legislators from Oregon, Michigan, and New Jersey really have a say on what
the people in Arizona can do or not do with their own land? Or a near dictatorial executive (regardless of race/ideology)? Unless their actions are
negatively affecting another state's citizens, the federal government should have NO say in the matter.

It is time for the states to reassert their rights. In order to do so, they will have to shed their fiscal dependency on the feds, though. You can't
count on federal subsidies for all your social programs and law enforcement and then demand sovereignty.
Some states are moving in that direction. Most aren't. Mine is moving in that direction, but its so dependent, it'll be a long time before it can
really demand sovereignty. Mores the shame.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.